linux-timemachine vs Restic
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted backup & recovery options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
linux-timemachine
rsync-based Time Machine style backups for Linux and macOS
VS
Restic
Fast, secure, efficient backup program
| Feature | linux-timemachine | Restic |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Backup & Recovery | Backup & Recovery |
| License | MIT | BSD-2-Clause |
| Language | Shell | Go |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 64 MB | 256 MB |
| Deployment | bare-metal, source | binary, docker |
| GitHub stars | ★ 840 | ★ 35,412 |
| First released | 2017 | 2015 |
| Replaces | Apple Time Machine | Backblaze, Carbonite |
Why pick each one
Frequently asked questions
Is linux-timemachine or Restic better?
Neither is universally better. Restic has the larger community, while linux-timemachine is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are linux-timemachine and Restic free and open-source?
Yes. linux-timemachine is licensed under MIT and Restic under BSD-2-Clause. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run linux-timemachine and Restic with Docker?
linux-timemachine: check the project docs for container support. Restic: yes.